Coleman v. Anderson

HARBISON, Chief Justice.

Appellant, a general contractor, was allowed recovery in the trial court for the balance due on a cost-plus contract for the construction of a home for appellees. The Court of Appeals reversed because appellant did not have a general contractor’s license at the time he entered into and completed the contract with appellees, as required by T.C.A. §§ 62-601 et seq.

The Court of Appeals relied upon and applied the rule stated in Farmer v. Farmer, 528 S.W.2d 539 (Tenn.1975) and Santi v. Crabb, 574 S.W.2d 732 (Tenn.1978).

The contract between the parties was dated May 12,…